Posted by bobs3304:

Bonn, the everyday fan would look at how the team have been organized and would assume that Isiah has been all over the place. But when you look at it closely, you'd realize that, all along, his intentions were to build a playoff contending team. He brought in all the role players we'd need, and was banking on Crawford being able to replace Houston at SG. However, it hasn't turned out the way he had hoped for. He brought in Q b/c we need relief at the 2, thus allowing Crawford to play some point, which better suits him.

Playoffs might be the short-term goal, but by going for high-ceiling players with (at least some of) his moves like Jamal Crawford and pursuing Kwame, I still think a championship is his long-term goal.

Posted by bobs3304:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by bobs3304:

Bonn, the everyday fan would look at how the team have been organized and would assume that Isiah has been all over the place. But when you look at it closely, you'd realize that, all along, his intentions were to build a playoff contending team. He brought in all the role players we'd need, and was banking on Crawford being able to replace Houston at SG. However, it hasn't turned out the way he had hoped for. He brought in Q b/c we need relief at the 2, thus allowing Crawford to play some point, which better suits him.

Playoffs might be the short-term goal, but by going for high-ceiling players with (at least some of) his moves like Jamal Crawford and pursuing Kwame, I still think a championship is his long-term goal.

Not sure you can have it both ways. Either you keep your experienced, proven Vets and bring in a coach that knows what he's doing while adding a legit Big.......or you normalize the cap situation, bring in young potential, and let Herb run the show for a few years.

I don't think those are either/or scenarios and I think Isiah is using some components of both of the options you highlighted. He's kept some vets: the ones who are athletic, tough, and can be part of playoff and championship teams (e.g., Marbury, JYD, Q). He's also bringing in young talent that has a lot of potential (Crawford, Nate) or trying to bring in that young talent (e.g., Kwame). I'm not sure what "normalizing the cap" has to do with this since you can accomplish both strategies (making the playoffs with vets and building with players with upside) without caring about how much the team owner pays his players. That's exactly what Isiah seems to be trying to do.

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Allanfan20:

That Hawk trade would be TERRIBLE. We wouldn't be bringing in Harrington for his expiring contract. Isiah loves him and would keep him. Plus, this creates a God Awful even worse logjam at the guard position with Delk and Lue, who are worthy of minutes. No thanks to that trade. Marbury is better than Harrington anyway. I don't see what Zeke likes in that trade, but not in Dalembert. I would hand in my Knick card if we did that, and then signed WALKER.

If ATL adds their 1st round pick in '06, & the cap space afforded from that deal gives the Knicks a realistic shot at signing Lebron in '07, i'm 100% behind that idea.

I would be down with that.

If the Knicks are seriously considering getting under the cap, then I could understand that move. But I see no evidence that they are going in that rebuilding direction. It looks like their direction is to get young, tough, athletic players via the draft and via trades with no regard for how much Dolan has to pay the players.

Unlike you, I take Isiah at his word. He has said the Knicks are rebuilding. IMO, there is no other way to end the "1973" chants.

I take nothing any GM says to the media at his word. I judge them by their actions.

He kept the three first round picks rather than trade them for veterans; he traded a 32 year old KT for a younger player (and a draft pick upgrade); he acquired Rose purportedly for the picks.

Outside of the Mo Taylor trade, which is inexplicably under any model, those would seem to be the actions of a GM who decided to rebuild after he couldn't follow up the Marbury trade with one for Rasheed.

What does that have to do with cap space (the initial topic I mentioned that you replied to). You're somehow making a connection between not trading draft picks and wanting to get under the cap. I just don't see the connection. You can keep your draft picks, successfully rebuild, AND have no intention of getting under the cap. You could even view taking back bad contracts as a way to rebuild with the draft while also furthering the amount of the cap the team is (e.g., the Malik Rose deal). This is what Isiah seems to be doing.

The intial topic was rebuilding.

VDesai: you mean like this?

HAHAHA!!!

Excuse me. I actually meant:

HAHA!!!

Posted by Nalod:

Posted by Nalod:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Allanfan20:

That Hawk trade would be TERRIBLE. We wouldn't be bringing in Harrington for his expiring contract. Isiah loves him and would keep him. Plus, this creates a God Awful even worse logjam at the guard position with Delk and Lue, who are worthy of minutes. No thanks to that trade. Marbury is better than Harrington anyway. I don't see what Zeke likes in that trade, but not in Dalembert. I would hand in my Knick card if we did that, and then signed WALKER.

If ATL adds their 1st round pick in '06, & the cap space afforded from that deal gives the Knicks a realistic shot at signing Lebron in '07, i'm 100% behind that idea.

I would be down with that.

If the Knicks are seriously considering getting under the cap, then I could understand that move. But I see no evidence that they are going in that rebuilding direction. It looks like their direction is to get young, tough, athletic players via the draft and via trades with no regard for how much Dolan has to pay the players.

Unlike you, I take Isiah at his word. He has said the Knicks are rebuilding. IMO, there is no other way to end the "1973" chants.

I take nothing any GM says to the media at his word. I judge them by their actions.

He kept the three first round picks rather than trade them for veterans; he traded a 32 year old KT for a younger player (and a draft pick upgrade); he acquired Rose purportedly for the picks.

Outside of the Mo Taylor trade, which is inexplicably under any model, those would seem to be the actions of a GM who decided to rebuild after he couldn't follow up the Marbury trade with one for Rasheed.

What does that have to do with cap space (the initial topic I mentioned that you replied to). You're somehow making a connection between not trading draft picks and wanting to get under the cap. I just don't see the connection. You can keep your draft picks, successfully rebuild, AND have no intention of getting under the cap. You could even view taking back bad contracts as a way to rebuild with the draft while also furthering the amount of the cap the team is (e.g., the Malik Rose deal). This is what Isiah seems to be doing.

The intial topic was rebuilding.

VDesai: you mean like this?

Looks like a big bowtie sidways.

Crop circle? Or a sign of some sort?

Posted by eViL:

Excuse me. I actually meant:

HAHA!!!

Posted by Nalod:

Posted by Nalod:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Allanfan20:

That Hawk trade would be TERRIBLE. We wouldn't be bringing in Harrington for his expiring contract. Isiah loves him and would keep him. Plus, this creates a God Awful even worse logjam at the guard position with Delk and Lue, who are worthy of minutes. No thanks to that trade. Marbury is better than Harrington anyway. I don't see what Zeke likes in that trade, but not in Dalembert. I would hand in my Knick card if we did that, and then signed WALKER.

If ATL adds their 1st round pick in '06, & the cap space afforded from that deal gives the Knicks a realistic shot at signing Lebron in '07, i'm 100% behind that idea.

I would be down with that.

If the Knicks are seriously considering getting under the cap, then I could understand that move. But I see no evidence that they are going in that rebuilding direction. It looks like their direction is to get young, tough, athletic players via the draft and via trades with no regard for how much Dolan has to pay the players.

Unlike you, I take Isiah at his word. He has said the Knicks are rebuilding. IMO, there is no other way to end the "1973" chants.

I take nothing any GM says to the media at his word. I judge them by their actions.

He kept the three first round picks rather than trade them for veterans; he traded a 32 year old KT for a younger player (and a draft pick upgrade); he acquired Rose purportedly for the picks.

Outside of the Mo Taylor trade, which is inexplicably under any model, those would seem to be the actions of a GM who decided to rebuild after he couldn't follow up the Marbury trade with one for Rasheed.

What does that have to do with cap space (the initial topic I mentioned that you replied to). You're somehow making a connection between not trading draft picks and wanting to get under the cap. I just don't see the connection. You can keep your draft picks, successfully rebuild, AND have no intention of getting under the cap. You could even view taking back bad contracts as a way to rebuild with the draft while also furthering the amount of the cap the team is (e.g., the Malik Rose deal). This is what Isiah seems to be doing.

The intial topic was rebuilding.

VDesai: you mean like this?

Looks like a big bowtie sidways.

Crop circle? Or a sign of some sort?

Wow, this is a biggie! Look at that initial post by Allanfan!

[Edited by - KnicksFan on 07/12/2005 17:15:26]

Posted by Knicksfan:

Posted by eViL:

Excuse me. I actually meant:

HAHA!!!

Posted by Nalod:

Posted by Nalod:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Allanfan20:

That Hawk trade would be TERRIBLE. We wouldn't be bringing in Harrington for his expiring contract. Isiah loves him and would keep him. Plus, this creates a God Awful even worse logjam at the guard position with Delk and Lue, who are worthy of minutes. No thanks to that trade. Marbury is better than Harrington anyway. I don't see what Zeke likes in that trade, but not in Dalembert. I would hand in my Knick card if we did that, and then signed WALKER.

If ATL adds their 1st round pick in '06, & the cap space afforded from that deal gives the Knicks a realistic shot at signing Lebron in '07, i'm 100% behind that idea.

I would be down with that.

If the Knicks are seriously considering getting under the cap, then I could understand that move. But I see no evidence that they are going in that rebuilding direction. It looks like their direction is to get young, tough, athletic players via the draft and via trades with no regard for how much Dolan has to pay the players.

Unlike you, I take Isiah at his word. He has said the Knicks are rebuilding. IMO, there is no other way to end the "1973" chants.

I take nothing any GM says to the media at his word. I judge them by their actions.

He kept the three first round picks rather than trade them for veterans; he traded a 32 year old KT for a younger player (and a draft pick upgrade); he acquired Rose purportedly for the picks.

Outside of the Mo Taylor trade, which is inexplicably under any model, those would seem to be the actions of a GM who decided to rebuild after he couldn't follow up the Marbury trade with one for Rasheed.

What does that have to do with cap space (the initial topic I mentioned that you replied to). You're somehow making a connection between not trading draft picks and wanting to get under the cap. I just don't see the connection. You can keep your draft picks, successfully rebuild, AND have no intention of getting under the cap. You could even view taking back bad contracts as a way to rebuild with the draft while also furthering the amount of the cap the team is (e.g., the Malik Rose deal). This is what Isiah seems to be doing.

The intial topic was rebuilding.

VDesai: you mean like this?

Looks like a big bowtie sidways.

Crop circle? Or a sign of some sort?

Wow, this is a biggie! Look at that initial post by Allanfan!

[Edited by - KnicksFan on 07/12/2005 17:15:26]

It gets pinched, really tight, soon its gonna look like Jessica Alba's you know what!

Post a picture, its been a while!

If that were to happened, doing the matbury trade, the Knicks would be below the salary cap within a yr for the first time in a long time.. ANYONE YELLING OUT LEBRON JAMES IN '07

Posted by Nalod:

Posted by Knicksfan:

Posted by eViL:

Excuse me. I actually meant:

HAHA!!!

Posted by Nalod:

Posted by Nalod:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Allanfan20:

That Hawk trade would be TERRIBLE. We wouldn't be bringing in Harrington for his expiring contract. Isiah loves him and would keep him. Plus, this creates a God Awful even worse logjam at the guard position with Delk and Lue, who are worthy of minutes. No thanks to that trade. Marbury is better than Harrington anyway. I don't see what Zeke likes in that trade, but not in Dalembert. I would hand in my Knick card if we did that, and then signed WALKER.

If ATL adds their 1st round pick in '06, & the cap space afforded from that deal gives the Knicks a realistic shot at signing Lebron in '07, i'm 100% behind that idea.

I would be down with that.

If the Knicks are seriously considering getting under the cap, then I could understand that move. But I see no evidence that they are going in that rebuilding direction. It looks like their direction is to get young, tough, athletic players via the draft and via trades with no regard for how much Dolan has to pay the players.

Unlike you, I take Isiah at his word. He has said the Knicks are rebuilding. IMO, there is no other way to end the "1973" chants.

I take nothing any GM says to the media at his word. I judge them by their actions.

He kept the three first round picks rather than trade them for veterans; he traded a 32 year old KT for a younger player (and a draft pick upgrade); he acquired Rose purportedly for the picks.

Outside of the Mo Taylor trade, which is inexplicably under any model, those would seem to be the actions of a GM who decided to rebuild after he couldn't follow up the Marbury trade with one for Rasheed.

What does that have to do with cap space (the initial topic I mentioned that you replied to). You're somehow making a connection between not trading draft picks and wanting to get under the cap. I just don't see the connection. You can keep your draft picks, successfully rebuild, AND have no intention of getting under the cap. You could even view taking back bad contracts as a way to rebuild with the draft while also furthering the amount of the cap the team is (e.g., the Malik Rose deal). This is what Isiah seems to be doing.

The intial topic was rebuilding.

VDesai: you mean like this?

Looks like a big bowtie sidways.

Crop circle? Or a sign of some sort?

Wow, this is a biggie! Look at that initial post by Allanfan!

[Edited by - KnicksFan on 07/12/2005 17:15:26]

It gets pinched, really tight, soon its gonna look like Jessica Alba's you know what!

Post a picture, its been a while!

Yes Nalod, this is exactly what I was talking about.